P.E.D. reports, “In any event, Wu is convinced that something is about to happen: ‘From our checks with industry and supply chain sources and a recent SEC 10-Q filing by AT&T mentioning that exclusivity with ‘”a number of attractive handsets’ could end, we have conviction that the iPhone could likely finally be at another carrier besides AT&T here in the U.S. in 2011 and potentially at Verizon in 2011 or 2012… We believe the argument for AAPL to pursue Verizon sooner than later is to address the growing presence of Android. What better way to do that than where Android has seen the majority of its success?'”
P.E.D. reports, “But, he adds: ‘From our understanding, the Verizon negotiations are not finalized with important details still being ironed out, including technology and economics. We think it is premature to rule out T-Mobile or Sprint (who also uses CDMA but WiMAX for 4G). In addition, there is the possibility of multiple U.S. carriers being signed.'”
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: In the article, Elmer-Dewitt reports that Wu thinks “Android would likely be impacted more by iPhone being carried on Verizon than BlackBerry [because] the features sets are closer and Android phones are being positioned as ‘iPhone alternatives.'” In Wu’s view, “the BlackBerry demographic is different where customers prefer physical keyboards and messaging applications like email and Twitter are most important.”
He is correct that Android would take a bigger hit from an iPhone on Verizon (Android’s claim to fame is the toehold it’s been temporarily gifted in the U.S precisely because people want iPhones, but iPhone is stuck exclusively on AT&T), but that does not mean the news is good for RIM. BlackBerry is failing on its own with an antiquated OS and hardware festooned with mechanical plastic buttons. The vast majority of customers who think they prefer physical keyboards are luddites who’ve not yet spent more than five minutes with an iPhone. RIM’s BlackBerry can’t even compete with Android. RIM’s failure to buy Palm – their one real chance, however slim it may have been – remains as appalling to us as ever. RIM is a dead company walking regardless of whether iPhone comes to Verizon or not.
Sprint is ready with it’s 4G bridge devices already to connect to all of Apple’s Wi-Fi iOS devices. All of them. Now. Easy to test the waters or fear jumping in. Where is Apple’s mobile Wi-Fi Airport bridge for your car? We already have it in our homes and at work.
Apple either give us one from you are let the other’s have it. I would love to see the other networks crushed by Apple customer traffic.
I want to see the iPhone on all four US carriers. Then the war will be about OS & design, rather than carrier.
It should have been illegal for carriers to lock a phone to their networks.
That’s like Walmart saying they won’t carry your brand of milk because you sell it to other stores in areas where they have no presence.
So what are the people supposed to do if your the only milk supplier to the area? Let people go without milk? Force them to travel 200 miles to a Walmart just to get milk?
If our elected officials in government did their jobs then there wouldn’t be the problem we see now.
We see how wonderful a job the Congress did playing with sub-prime housing mortgages with our taxpayers money. The bailout is already $500 billion and could go as high as $5 trillion if everyone defaults.
Brains are getting harder to come by today. We are dumbing down fast.
I love it they describe RIM hardware as being “festooned” with plastic buttons.
Festooned… thats a funny word.
Sprint please!
If it wasn’t for Android growth on Verizon, I’d wish for Sprint and T-Mobile and make Verizon suffer.
Verizon had first dibs and passed. Since that time, they have been particularly critical of Apple. And you’ve got Google and Verizon’s position on net neutrality to consider.
“illegal for carriers to lock a phone to their network”
The only reason you’re getting an iPhone for $199 is because it was locked to AT&T.
Exclusivity means Apple can get a lot more per phone — somewhere in the neighborhood of $400 for each new contract.
Americans don’t understand that these things are HEAVILY SUBSIDIZED.
I’d rather pay $599 and have a $50/mo bill than the current plan.
Android’s toehold is a nearly profitless one, with Google giving away the OS (much of which is cheaply copied from Java) in order to guide users to their search. Handset makers installing Android are the ones who are losing money or barely making anything. Moreover, they are spending massive amounts on advertising and product giveaways in a desperate attempt to build a market base before the iPhone is available on more carriers. Android is a paper tiger, one that will soon be ripped to shreds by wider iPhone availability and lawsuits from Apple and Oracle.
“It’s just like an iPhone”
http://scottworldblog.wordpress.com/2010/08/13/its-just-like-an-iphone/
Verizon loves to play hardball. They are so arrogant and pompous. The iPhone will come to Verizon, but ONLY when Apple get’s the right deal.
I mean who want’s a iPhone with the stupid VZ logo painted in red on it? Also Verizon has terrible customer service, billing practices and rate plans.
I’m not completely defending AT&T, but my bill is the same each month down to the penny. That NEVER happens with Verizon!
Like Windows, for many Blackberry users it’s not exactly personal choice, it gets rammed down their throats by the folks who sign their paychecks.
There’s little room for argument there.
I’ve got it so ingrained in my head that the iPhone will be on Verizon in January that if it isn’t, I may go insane. I’ve held off upgrading my phone for 4 months and counting just waiting for that announcement.
@imageone – My Verizon bill is always the same. Down to the penny.
@MacInScott – Sprint is dead and just doesn’t know it yet. Its choice of WiMAX as 4G is equivalent to the movie studios that chose HD DVD over Blu-Ray – they’re going to have to change or be left behind (or die, which is most probable IMO).
When the iPhone comes to Verizon I suspect it will bring Verizon’s network to its knees. That will be as effective a way to halt Android sales as offering the iPhone on Verizon.
@anonymous coward
Do you realize the only reason you can get an iPhone for $99 or $199 is because of that exclusivity? Ever seen how much an unlocked iPhone sells for elsewhere? It approaches $1000. Carrier lock-ins suck, but they are necessary if you want an affordable device.
Just to give a alternative.
Once can get a $300 netbook, a magic jack and pay only $20 a year for unlimited local and long distance. Great for a land line and the bulk of your calls. Or if traveling and calling home to talk a lot using the hotels wifi. Skype or iChat also can be used.
Then get a pay as you go mobile phone for $20 which uses AT&T networks and only pay for minutes as you use them.
There are carriers with unlimited mobile plans for a mere $45 a month.
Do without the “smart” in your phone and shift your calls to a cheaper land line or computer is a wonderful way to save ton’s of money.
I take a Ubuntu netbook along with me on the road if I need to access the internet, keeping my expensive MacBook Pro’s at home in a safe with all the robberies going on now.
@emmayche
Sprint may not be dead yet. China has chosen Wi-Max as it’s 4G technology; that’s a lot of push behind the technology.
Why does this idiotic “rumor” keep getting dredged up?
When has Apple been known to support dying technologies, like CDMA? Or Flash? Or Floppies? Or VGA, Serial or SCSI ports?
Okay. Why would Apple release a CDMA version of the iPhone?
CDMA is tomorrow’s floppy disk.
Currently, Verizon uses CDMA. I could see Apple partnering with them when Verizon activates their 4G network… under Apple’s terms… not before.
Most bussiness customers “prefer” RIM because their companies say so. What would happen if people are given a choice at work?
Along with the last story, think a couple years from now more than half of businesses and governments outside the US will be off of RIM and PCs.
Mr. Reeee:
A CDMA iPhone has already been tested in the wild, and a factory in China is already set to manufacture it. Speculation is that it will be for China Telecom, though.
A CDMA chip (likely by Qualcomm) costs very little and is extremely easy to engineer into an iPhone. No need to re-invent this wheel — it has been done by countless other phone manufacturers, as so many phone models exist for both GSM and CDMA markets.
The cheapest iPhone plan today is $55 per month. In order to make it worthwhile to buy an unsubisidised device (if one were available to begin with), the plan would need to be at most $40 per month (total voice and lowest limited data). And even at $40, it would still take over two years of savings to match the subsidised plan. Let’s not forget that with the subsidised plan, you’re paying the phone off over many months (kind of like an interest-free bank loan), whereas with a full up-front price and this (imaginary) cheaper plan, you’d have to pony up over $600 for a phone, so that you could save $15 per month.
@Mr. Reeee
You are right, the problem is that Android is a thorn in Apple’s side that needs to be destroyed. So Apple will forgive CDMA its antiquity this time in order to stomp out a competitor.
@Predrag
Glad to see you’re back.
Another theory about the source of this rumour: AT&T. As long as people postpone upgrading their 3G (or even 3GS) to iPhone 4, they will continue to pay the full monthly plan (which contains the subsidy part) well after they have already paid off their subsidy in full. AT&T continues to get free money from their subscribers, while they patiently wait for a Verizon phone that will never come. Eventually, they will give up the wait get yet another iPhone (iPhone 5 perhaps), but not before AT&T collected many months of free cash from the subscriber who let the contract expire without getting a new subsidised phone.
AT&T loves those kind of customers the most — the ones that let their contract expire and that pay month-to-month. The subsidy portion of that monthly plan is quite large, and it is the greatest legitimate rip-off by the carriers.
Do you realize the only reason you can get an iPhone for $99 or $199 is because of that exclusivity? Ever seen how much an unlocked iPhone sells for elsewhere? It approaches $1000. Carrier lock-ins suck, but they are necessary if you want an affordable device.
Do the math over the length of the contract.
AT&T is charging a extra $55 a month compared to the lowest other equal smart phone plans.
It would be much less expensive to pull loan from your bank for 5% a year and buy the iPhone for $600 and paying $60 in interest and then pay only $45 a month for service ($1740 total), than enter a contract for $199 and $100 a month for 24 months for service. ($2600 total)
So where is that spare $860 going uh?
Thanks, MrMcLargeHuge! Glad you noticed!
anonymous coward:
Two errors in your post make your argument flawed.
1. You can’t find an unsubsidised new iPhone for $600. In the markets where it can be legitimately bought without a subsidy, the iPhone 4G is sold for at least $600 EUR (about $760 today).
2. The cheapest iPhone plan with AT&T is $55. The same plan is available with other smartphones on AT&T. Sprint offers the next cheapest plan at $70. T-Mobile and Verizon require at least an $80 per month plan for any proper smartphone. T-Mobile is the only one that offers unsubsidised plans (without contract), and even their cheapest smartphone plan is STILL more expensive ($60) than AT&T’s cheapest FULLY SUBSIDISED iPhone plan. I know we’re comparing apples and oranges a bit (Apple’s plan is limited data, while others are unlimited), but that is beside the point, since vast majority of users don’t even exceed the cheapest data allocation.
I still think it’s gonna be everybody *but* Verizon. T-Mobile and Sprint and whoever, but *not* Verizon. Verizon laughed His Steveness out of their offices when he came around the first time, and you just don’t do that.
When MDN adopts “ignore” lists like those on some other blogs (I’ll not mention names out of respect to MDN), I can tell you this; the anonymous coward will be the first one on my list.
Talk about idiots…
@Mr Reeee
I don’t think you know much about CDMA, the way you, and others, keep referring to it as a “dying” technology, when it is very much alive and will continue to remain the only source of connectivity for many areas of the US for years to come.
The fact is, CDMA is still advancing. Orthogonal FDMA, or Flash OFDMA as its called, is still being developed into a 4G standard. I would imagine implementations of OFCDMA will include backwards compatibility with CDMA.
The fact is, AT&T introduced 3G in July 2004, but when Steve Jobs introduced the iPhone in 2007, he said that because 3G was not widespread enough, nor were its chips energy efficient enough to be included in the iPhone, he would go forward with 2G.
The fact is, Steve Jobs was prepared to go forward with Verizon and CDMA, before talks broke off.
In other words, he chose to embrace a “dying” technology because its more prevalent.
Here we are, standing on the threshold of 4G and both Verizon and AT&T have promised to “migrate toward” LTE by 2011. Verizon has suffered several setbacks in their attempt to deploy LTE because, I believe, LTE is still in a state of flux. LTE Advanced holds much more promise and even though its backwards compatible with LTE, Verizon may be rethinking their deployment strategy.
In the meantime, vendors want to get their products to market and like Steve Jobs, wasn’t waiting for a three-year-old 3G technology to become ubiquitous. You have to jump in at some point and begin planning for technological advances.
There are several weakness in CDMA that have been exposed by the advances in handsets, but the investment is too great to just walk away. Verizon, I’m sure, has a keen interest in the latest advances made in the MC-CDMA protocol and will continue to use these iterations as a bridge to 4G.
I totally agree with “imageone” about Verizon wireless. I currently have both Verizon with family plan and on AT&T with sister’s family plan. Verizon has terrible customer service, and seemed trained to only say “no”. They say that data has been used when none of my family members downloaded or surf anything. Then they can not tell me what was downloaded or surfed. If Verizon gets the IPHONE, I hope Steve Jobs work his magic and get us unlimited data with LTE service. Otherwise, let’s use the other carriers, Sprint and T-Mobile.
I’ve been pretty happy with my AT&T service except for the one place I need it most – around my home! I live just up in the hills from a HUGE SoCal Valley where you would think you might be well covered but alas such is not the case. So it seems either a AT&T Microcell is needed or another service provider. Since I’ve waited this long for a new iPhone I too am tempted to see what a Verizon phone could do but I’m worried about the resale on a CDMA phone, which seems to be a dead system. And travel overseas which is pretty much all GSM (like AT&T) would then mean using a different phone for travel.
@MacDaddy
“Verizon laughed His Steveness out of their offices…”
Your characterization is myth, as is your portrayal of SJ as some immature grudge holder.
It’s just business. Verizon listened to SJs proposal and both failed to negotiate the terms of the agreement. Your idea that they laughed at SJ is just bullshit and why you keep peddling that notion is beyond me.
What SJ did was, hold his ground. There may have been a number of follow-up discussions, but they were low-level negotiations by Seconds who wanted this deal to happen. But, as is his nature, Steve Jobs doesn’t look back and he won’t ask you twice.
He gave up on Verizon the moment they began negotiating their side of the deal. He knew before he left their offices, Verizon was not the right partner. Not because they wanted to imprint their style all over his product, but because Steve Jobs knew, the people making the decisions at Verizon were weak and clinging to their comfort zone of control.
Steve Jobs saw Verizon as the lessor of two evils and approached them first.
So, who’s laughing now?
@ Mr. Reeee
“The only reason you’re getting an iPhone for $199 is because it was locked to AT&T . . .
Americans don’t understand that these things are HEAVILY SUBSIDIZED.”
Then why can RIM sell 2 non exclusive Blackberries for $99?
Yes, the original contract was important after brain dead Verizon turned down the iPhone. It’s now time for some competition.
T-Mobile is GSM… a lot easier to go there first…
After that, see how VZ & Sprint networks are really handling data.
But T-Mobile will be a nice initial boast. I know quite a number with jailbroken iPhones that would be willing to buy a legit iPhone 4.
And too, say 20% of T-Mobile customers get the iPhone… Apple should be able to make enough… with VZ, there will surely be a backlog of orders.
@PreDrag
The flaws in your argument are:
1: That under a correct free market system, a phone would not be tied to any particular carrier, thus one would decide first the carrier and terms of the 24 month contract before buying the correct phone version to suit that carriers network.
2: That under a correct free market system, Apple or others would provide financing for the phone if one couldn’t afford it all at once.
3: That under a correct free market system, Apple would be forced to compete on equal ground with other phone providers on price and features. This could bring down the price per unit so more can afford one.
4: That under a correct free market system, carriers compete for customers based upon price, features and service.
Carriers are not operating under normal market conditions, they are co-conspiring with the hardware makers to set prices and cheat the consumer.
The US Government is quick to slap fines on foreign LCD makers for conspiring to set prices, but here in the U.S. they turn a blind eye to the cr*p running in their very own backyard.
And the reason for allowing them to get away with it, is because they using the carriers to spy and track everyone in the country.
@G4Dualie: “Your idea that they laughed at SJ is just bullshit and why you keep peddling that notion is beyond me.”
Granted, I’m dramatizing the actual happenings around Verizon’s disbelief that iPhone would be worth what Jobs was asking – perhaps I should have used a smilie… and I could be wrong about which US carrier gets the iPhone next.
I iCal’d an earlier statement of mine to the effect that it won’t be Verizon… I wouldn’t mind being wrong (I’m perfectly happy w/ATT) but I guess we’ll see.
If it *does* turn out to be Verizon, I’ll be right here with the link to my post, pointing out my bad prediction for all to see. I’ll try not to gloat if I’m right
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />
Whoever it is, I hope some competition will bring the monthly plan prices down. Everyone will win.
“festooned with mechanical plastic buttons”
A classic MDN line to remember!
@Mac Daddy
Fair enough.
Whoever it is, I hope some competition will bring the monthly plan prices down. Everyone will win.
When the iPhone is available on all carriers, we will see some very interesting occurrences among competitors.
For starters, the basic design of iPhone 4 is the same across all models and when every carrier has the iPhone, it will be the bench standard upon which we will compare services for all of the carriers.
Unlike the way it is now, with so many flavors of the same phone, even identical phones running different OS’s, the carriers are able to deflect any criticism of them and their network. But, not with iPhone.
For example, suppose Verizon’s network fails to crumble under the weight of a massive influx of iPhone’s? What’s that say about AT&T?
On the other hand, Verizon’s customer service had better be prepared to discuss the shortcomings of iPhone performance on their network, should they arise, because iPhone consumers can easily verify if what Verizon is saying is true.
Comparisons of dropped calls and speed will become major marketing ploys for all carriers and they’ll be using iPhone as the standard.
“Hold a man over a volcano and you may discover his true nature.”
– Shawn Yu
Eight years after Joss Whedons’ Firefly was cancelled and I am still reminded from that line from the episode ‘Out of Gas’ whenever MDN quote this analyst.
Sorry for the off-topic
I’ve said it here before: While it is not impossible, it is *extremely* unlikely that Apple will support a Sprint iPhone in the near future.
AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile (among others) are going to LTE. Spring is going with WiMax. An inferior technology for the truly mobile world (a relative phone to tower motion of about 35-40 mph or more in the urban canyons drives WiMax nuts — even the so called “mobile” variant of WiMax).
Apple *might* support a CDMA-LTE phone and a GSM-LTE phone moving eventually to LTE only. Apple *might* even ship a CDMA-GSM-LTE phone (if they can get both the physical size and power requirements of such a device down low enough).
However, it is *extremely* unlikely that Apple will support all of
1. GSM-LTE iPhone (AT&T and T-Mobile among others)
2. CDMA-LTE iPhone (Verizon and others)
3. CDMA-WiMax (pretty much just Sprint).
True some major Chineese carriers are going WiMax. However, with the tweaks to the standard being required by the Chineese government no one can come even close to honestly saying the Chineese WiMax is the same as the Spring WiMax.
Also, from *everything* I’ve read or talked to relevant engineers about a CDMA-GSM-LTE-WiMax chip indicates such a device will be way to big and way to power hungry for a few years to come.
As for CDMA being a “dying technology”. It’s not. It’s just not what the vast majority of the cell phone world will be using in 2-4 years. CDMA is most definitely *not* the future of cell phones (smart or otherwise).